Yes, yes, yes: Armstrong finally comes clean

IT WAS the simplest of words, but one that Lance Armstrong had never been able to bring himself to say.

However, when the 41-year-old Texan answered ''yes'' to each of Oprah Winfrey's first five questions in her much-anticipated interview with him, a giant step had been taken.

Don't be mistaken, by no means is this the end of the Armstrong story - the ramifications and fallout from his interview with Winfrey will be far-reaching.

This story is not just a doping story, but a human story extending beyond sport, considering the litany of lives that have been left in tatters because of it.

And because of that complexity, the interview did raise questions over how much Armstrong was still keeping close to his chest.

However, the first part of his two-part interview with Winfrey was intriguing.

Held in a hotel in his home town of Austin, Texas, it began with good pace and purpose and with Winfrey asking Armstrong: ''Did you ever take banned substances to enhance your cycling performance'', to which he replied: ''yes''. Armstrong then repeated the same word when asked if he had ever used erythropoietin (EPO), testosterone, human growth hormones, and cortisone and/or if he had even taken blood transfusions en-route to winning seven Tours de France from 1999 to 2005.

He only stopped when Winfrey asked ''if it was humanly possible to win the Tour de France without doping seven times in a row'' to which he replied: ''Not in my opinion.'' Later, he then denied doping during his 2009-11 comeback, during which he raced the tour twice more without winning.

''The last time I crossed the line, that line, was 2005,'' said Armstrong, his reference to the line being the moment he chose to take illegal drugs to win.

Nevertheless, it was inevitable that the 2½ hour interview would raise more questions. It is hoped there will be more answers in the second part, to be aired on Saturday at 1pm.

We still need to hear more about his associations with the Union Cycliste Internationale. He tripped up on Friday, fuelling continued doubts, when asked a question in reference to a donation he made to the UCI in 2005 to help fight doping, saying he made it when he retired. In fact, he made two donations to the world body when he was a rider, the first being in May 2002.

It is a concern that Armstrong still defended Italian doctor Michele Ferrari, who was one of five former associates of the American who was also banned for life.

It was still interesting to hear Armstrong embrace his role in doping and attempt to convince viewers that he accepted his guilt.

''I made my decisions. They're my mistake. And I'm sitting here today to acknowledge that and to say I'm sorry for that,'' he said.

Sure, many believe that is the mindset of a doper - that everyone does it, so why not me? Trouble is, some riders were strong enough to not follow that path in his day - take, for instance, Frenchman Christophe Bassons who was more or less driven out of the sport when he ran foul of Armstrong.

It is worrying, as Armstrong revealed, that during his racing years he never saw doping as cheating. Asked if he ever felt bad or wrong about doping, he flatly told Winfrey: ''No.'' He then explained how one day: ''I went in and I just looked up the definition of cheat. And the definition of cheat is to gain an advantage on a rival or foe, you know, that they don't have or that they - you know, I didn't do it that way. I viewed it as a level playing field.''

But as the leader he was in world cycling, the authority he had in the peloton could have forced change had he wanted it - especially someone with Armstrong's personality.

As careful as he may have been with his confessions, it was clear during the interview that he felt uncomfortable on several issues.

He wrestled with questions that related to claims he had threatened to sack riders from his team if they did not dope. He baulked and paused in his answers. Placing his hand on his heart may have been a subconscious reinforcement of his desire to be seen as sincere. Steering the interview to his family upbringing resuscitated him again. But he finally conceded that he was a bully. ''I was a bully in the sense that I tried to control the narrative and if I didn't like what somebody said … I tried to control that and say that's a lie, they're liars,'' Armstrong said.

He at least recognised that he owes an apology to Emma O'Reilly, his former soigneur on the US Postal Service team.

But he was also unwilling to speak in depth about his broken relations with Betsy Andreu, the wife of his former teammate Frankie Andreu, who he smeared publicly for her claims of drugs use.

There would, no doubt, be a huge line-up of aggrieved parties.

And Armstrong knows they will start lining up soon, if they have not already after the tempered contrition he showed on Friday to those he wronged.

He admitted that if he could turn time back, he would co-operate with the USADA investigation (as did 11 former teammates who testified). Little wonder.

This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cycling/yes-yes-yes-armstrong-finally-comes-clean-20130118-2cyyt.html